New Delhi [India], September 7 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has reserved its verdict on whether it has the jurisdiction to hear a petition filed by PB Agro LLP, makers of the chewing elaichi brand, challenging show-cause notices issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to its celebrity brand ambassadors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma reserved orders after hearing arguments from the company, the Central Government and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) on the preliminary question of jurisdiction.
PB Agro has approached the Delhi High Court seeking directions to quash the notices issued by the Maharashtra FDA in connection with advertisements featuring the three Bollywood actors for a brand linked with pan masala.
The controversy arose from the Maharashtra FDA’s allegation that advertisements for its chewing elaichi brand amounted to surrogate promotion of the brand’s Pan Masala, a chewable product banned in Maharashtra.
The state regulator had reportedly asked the actors to submit documents showing that the chewable-elaichi was distinct from banned pan masala products. It had also sought the stopping of the promotional campaign and removal of related material from digital platforms.
Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur, appearing for PB Agro, argued that the show-cause notice dated August 11, 2026 was issued only to the brand ambassadors and not to the company, despite the company being directly affected by any action taken against the campaign.
The company also questioned the jurisdiction of the Maharashtra FDA to direct the discontinuation of the advertisements. It contended that allegations of surrogate advertising were without basis, claiming that the Pan Masala-linked brand had not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001.
PB Agro further submitted that pan masala containing tobacco had already been barred nationwide following a Supreme Court ruling in 2013. The company also told the Court that the CCPA was independently examining similar allegations but had not issued any direction against the advertisement campaign.
Advocate Rukhmini Bobde, appearing for the Central Government and the CCPA, opposed the maintainability of the petition before the Delhi High Court. She argued that the challenge to a notice issued by the Maharashtra FDA should have been brought before the Bombay High Court.
She submitted that the Maharashtra Government, which had issued the show-cause notice, was not before the Delhi High Court to defend its action. Bobde also clarified that while the CCPA was conducting its own proceedings concerning similar allegations, it had no objection to the Maharashtra FDA’s notice.
“The government of Maharashtra, which has passed the show-cause notice, is not here to defend its show-cause notice,” the counsel submitted.
After hearing the rival submissions, Justice Sharma reserved her verdict on the issue of whether the Delhi High Court can entertain the petition. (ANI)
Related reading
